would u trade for Foles?

  • To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.
Boffo97 said:
He was looking really good before getting hurt. If we can sign him to a relatively cheap contract that protects us in case he gets hurt, and still draft a 2nd or 3rd round QB (don't want reach for a 1st rounder if the 1st round worthy guys are gone, which I think will be the case), it's probably our best bet. He MIGHT get hurt. Or he might do really well.

Total tangent, but according to what it says quoting you above, you are apparently member #666 of this board.
Click to expand...
lol no im just a realist. just see nothing good out ofbradford coming back but another dissapointment.
 
Horse of a different color. Foles would be a younger backup compared to Hill, and a younger more-experienced backup compared to Davis. My bet is we will have SB, Rookie QB TBD, and AD. IMO, it would make no sense to trade for him.
 
I would loved to have had him after last season but after how he has been this year with his inconsistency, and now his broken collarbone or whatever he injured, I'm gonna have to pass on this one.
 
lockdnram21 said:
More like a homer to me lol. But we will we just have to disagree.
Click to expand...
If you have no argument other than the people you disagree with supposedly being homers, you have no argument.

Also from the Terms of Service and Rules of this place:
3. Verbal Assaults. This is a friendly forum, an information exchange, and a place to agree to disagree. Personal attacks will NOT be tolerated.
(snip)
  • Avoid dismissive stereotyping, such as labeling another poster (i.e., hater, apologist, homer, etc).
 
  • 4Like
Reactions: Cygnus, BigRamFan, dieterbrock and 1 other person
Boffo97 said:
If you have no argument other than the people you disagree with supposedly being homers, you have no argument.

Also from the Terms of Service and Rules of this place:
3. Verbal Assaults. This is a friendly forum, an information exchange, and a place to agree to disagree. Personal attacks will NOT be tolerated.
(snip)
  • Avoid dismissive stereotyping, such as labeling another poster (i.e., hater, apologist, homer, etc).
Click to expand...
Sorr
Boffo97 said:
If you have no argument other than the people you disagree with supposedly being homers, you have no argument.

Also from the Terms of Service and Rules of this place:
3. Verbal Assaults. This is a friendly forum, an information exchange, and a place to agree to disagree. Personal attacks will NOT be tolerated.
(snip)
  • Avoid dismissive stereotyping, such as labeling another poster (i.e., hater, apologist, homer, etc).
Click to expand...
Sorry bout that
 
  • Like
Reactions: dieterbrock
No. No. And no. Not sold on Foles. But I would trad Bradford for Eli if given the chance. Both would get a chance to start over in a different city and I would bet both teams could make the salary cap work.
 
lockdnram21 said:
More like a homer to me lol. But we will we just have to disagree.
Click to expand...

17zw35.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: DaveFan'51 and rhinobean
lockdnram21 said:
More like a homer to me lol. But we will we just have to disagree.
Click to expand...
Saw that you apologized for this. Thanks. Of course you already knew that rule - didn't you.

Anyway, as heated as it sometimes gets, you always want to think before hitting the "post reply" button.

BTW - As you can see, the term Homer is worn proudly by many on here. I personally don't pretend to be anything but.
 
dieterbrock said:
People forget that Foles looked pretty good as a rookie in Andy Reid's WCO and was considered a square peg in Kelly's spread, hence was Michael Vick's back up.
I'd gladly take Foles off Philly's hands for a 4th rounder
Click to expand...
I guess I don't remember that(him looking pretty good). Eagles were 1-5 in his starts and his numbers weren't too impressive either:
60.8% 6.4 ypa 6TD(2.3%)/5Int 79.1 rating.

Aren't those pretty much Austin Davis numbers?
3-5 63.4% 7.0 ypa 12TD(4.2%)9Int 85.1 rating

Actually, they're not even as "good" as Davis'. Which should say something, shouldn't it?
 
moklerman said:
I guess I don't remember that(him looking pretty good). Eagles were 1-5 in his starts and his numbers weren't too impressive either:
60.8% 6.4 ypa 6TD(2.3%)/5Int 79.1 rating.

Aren't those pretty much Austin Davis numbers?
3-5 63.4% 7.0 ypa 12TD(4.2%)9Int 85.1 rating

Actually, they're not even as "good" as Davis'. Which should say something, shouldn't it?
Click to expand...
Austin Davis 3rd year player numbers vs a rookie? Pretty fair comparison eh?
I take it that you didnt see him play, because he was pretty good. The team was terrible, had quit on Reid.
In any event, unlike Davis, Foles game improved as he played, posted 300+ yard games in 2 of his 3 starts
And when Kelly was hired, he was thought to be a square peg yet Kelly kept him
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back